Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Sign in to follow this  
ozjohn

Which Coin

Recommended Posts

The first scan is a NGC slabbed halfcrown  graded MS 62 while the lsecond scan is an ungraded 1917 halfcrown.

My view is that the iungraded coin is the better coin perhaps MS 63/64 when compared with the slabbed coin.

Any thoughts would be appreciated

1917 Halfcrown NGC MS 62.jpg

1917 Halfcrown.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better strike on the second's reverse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rob said:

Better strike on the second's reverse.

Yes, definitely the second coin for me, if only for the better strike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the weakness of the strike on the reverse is obvious on the second scan but harder to decide if it could be wear on the obverse of this coin which brings us back to the difficulty in grading this series of coins. Sometimes the milling can provide  some clues. However with NGC slabs the milling is completely hidden although it would have been visible to the original grader.

The scan of the 1916 halfcrown  shows what looks like wear on the obverse especially on the top of the king's ear although the reverse is pretty good strike. Examination of the milled edge shows it to be in pristine condition ( not scanned  as it is hard to do on a flat bed scanner). From that I would conclude this coin is in pretty close to UNC condition  with a poorly struck obverse. I know the TPG try to gage the strike when appraising a coin but IMO this one would struggle to receive a VF grading if it was determined that the obverse condition was due to wear rather than a poor strike. 

 

1916 Halfcrown.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The obverse looks a lot worse on the 1916 compared to the 1917

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's a combination of wear and weak strike. The reverse is clearly EF, while the obverse has wear (looking at the discoloured areas), but if it was a weak strike it wouldn't take much wear to make it look like that (VF for appearance).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but the milling is pristine and in my experience the milling  receives a lot of wear during circulation. Also the obverse field has none of the usual scratches bumps etc. In fact in hand the fields of coin appears to have much of their original lustre. Maybe it was damaged some time in its life? Who knows but it does serve to illustrate the difficulty in grading poorly minted coins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JMHO, but the second coin in the OP is the better by a bit because of strike on reverse as was said but also on the obverse. The second coin may have some minor edge dings, or so it appears.

In cases of soft or incomplete striking, the discoloration on "high" points may not always be wear, so be careful (beware, LOL).

Newer NGC holders are of the tine type so that most of the edge can in fact be observed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found this one on Ebay https://www.ebay.com/itm/Great-Britain-George-V-Silver-1915-1-2-Crown-PCGS-MS63-WWI-Issue-Toned-KM-818-1/302606398962?epid=102093249&hash=item4674bf35f2:g:r2UAAOSwHUhaHfuP  

It does not look the same as the one I posted however the obverse strike is pretty poor even so it obtained a MS 63 grading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also worth bearing in mind that the coins advertised will be skewed, with those getting a higher grade than one might expect being advertised for sale with the number made prominent, whereas those the owner feels to be undergraded are more likely to disappear into the collection - particularly those slabbed in the 63-65 region. Below that it is less likely to be an issue unless rare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have rephotographed the 1916 coin with my new Sony camera fitted with a macro lens taken 1/40s at f /5.5 which gives a better image than the original scan also a photo showing the milling. The light source was 2 el cheapo LED clip on flexible reading lamps which may not be the best for this kind of work

 

 

 

 

 

DSC00307.JPG

1916 Halfcrown a.jpg

Edited by ozjohn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a few 1916's but only one that has been graded by a TPG. This was graded by CGS at CGS 78 as a comparison.

1916-hc4.jpg

Yours looks to have a better strike on the reverse compared to mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A cracking obverse however. I guess we are lucky that sufficient coins have survived the years so we can admire them.

The subject coin is not my best example but a coin I have had for many years. I think I was intrigued when I brought it as it seemed to be of a high grade but on closer examination seemed to show some wear. This was before I learnt of all the problems the RM was having with these coins. I doubt if it cost more than $10 at the time.

Edited by ozjohn
Extra info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×